State v. Ziglar, 209 N.C. App. 461 (Feb. 1, 2011)

 In a felony death by vehicle case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sustaining the State’s objection when defense counsel asked the defendant whether he would have been able to stop the vehicle if it had working brakes. Because a lay opinion must be rationally based on the witness’s perception, for the defendant’s opinion to be admissible, some foundational evidence was required to show that he had, at some point, perceived his ability, while highly intoxicated, to slow down the vehicle as it went through the curve at an excessive speed. However, there was no evidence that the defendant ever had perceived his ability to stop the car under the hypothetical circumstances.